Movie Collector OH

My monthly updates are up. Premieres list: http://moviecollector.us/reports/Future_Premieres.htm Project: http://moviecollector.us/reports.htm I am considering dropping shorts altogether from the premieres list. Any thoughts?

A lot of technical inquiries here. I'll try to cover them and keep it simple. 720p and 1080i are just commonly used HD broadcast resolutions used these days. There is also 1080p, which has a higher bandwidth requirement than either of those, and is therefore only used with Blu-Ray and some forms of streaming. There are minor differences between 1080i and 720p. Some people can tell the difference and others can't. 1080i has better detail, and 720p has smoother motion. For more on this, look up the difference between "interlaced" versus "progressive" display. TCM is natively broadcast at 1080i. They don't actually show films, the films are all in storage. There are facilities which have large computers that have these movies stored in digital format. Whenever they show a movie, it unceremoniously originates from one of these broadcast facilities. The TCM library includes most of, but is not limited to these acquisitions (though there are still some rights issues within these properties): MGM RKO Warner Bros First National Vitaphone United Artists Goldwyn Monogram Associated Artists Hanna-Barbera Castle Rock New Line Cinema Turner Allied Artists Rankin/Bass Lorimar Ruby-Spears Fleischer Studios Famous Studios Digital cinema is a cheap way to approximate the "analog" content on film (or digital audio is a cheap way to approximate the "analog" content on records or tapes). The main thing to know here is that we as humans perceive everything in the analog domain ("analogous" or 1:1 representation). The way it is stored, delivered, and reproduced though has changed from analog to digital (numbers), mainly for the sake of conveniece and economy of scale. For instance, that makes DVRs possible that can store hundreds of shows all at once. Rather than store everything as direct images or direct sound recordings, it is first converted into numbers, then those numbers are more easily stored or moved around. That takes up much less space, is cheaper to duplicate, and faster to access. When needed, the digitally stored content is converted back into the analog domain, so it can be seen or heard. In the case of a flat panel HD TV, that happens all the way at the end of the process - at the screen itself. The LCD panel, for instance, has a digital-to-analog convertor chip that converts digital (numeric) input to a matrix of visible pixels of light (analog). The end result is that you see an "approximated" version of what you would otherwise see using an all-analog signal chain. Similar for the audio. There is a digital-to-analog convertor which converts digital audio to analog audio, which then goes through an audio amplifier and then out to the speakers. In many cases, consumer digital video approaches the quality of studio monitors used in the production environment, previously unattainable to the average consumer. The improvement in quality would be another "economy of scale" benefit from the conversion to digital. In the case of over-the-air broadcast TV, UHF transmitters like these are used to transmit digital TV. (This company has been making transmitters for almost 100 years) The tall narrow cabinets in the pictures are full sized equipment racks - these go into a shed underneath the transmitter tower or as close as possible: UHF TV transmitters (now used for digital TV) http://www.gatesair.com/products/transmit-tv/uhf-transmitters FM transmitters http://www.gatesair.com/products/transmit-radio/fm-transmitters AM transmitters http://www.gatesair.com/products/transmit-radio/am-transmitters Multimedia timeline page for big US transmitter manufacturer http://info.gatesair.com/celebrate-95-years-with-gatesair P.S. The difference between the CRT you like and the flat-screen LCD TV which bothers you might be due to the differences in way light is handled between the two. The CRT has a mask which blocks light, and therefore you only see light coming from the luminesient phosphors themselves. An LCD on the other hand has a backlight which is always on. That diminishes the contrast on less expensive LCD TVs. A higher quality LCD TV might handle this more acceptably for you. The only way to tell is to go to a TV showroom and walk around and compare them to see if it makes any difference to you. Also there are some newer options out there whose technology behaves more like the phosphors in a CRT, "OLED" TVs, which don't use a backlight at all. Unfortunately they are prohibitively expensive for many.

There are a few different locals I listen to online during the day while I work. These Arbys commercials are in fairly heavy rotation on one or two of the stations I listen to around the country. At first I saw the humor in them, then I found them annoying, now I just tune them out. I wouldn't mind seeing him on a TV show or in a film, but let's just say these commercials haven't exactly influenced me in any way.

From your lips to AT&T's ears. I also like the current roster of hosts.

I wasn't thinking of Vasquez's or Malone's voices. My post was a reply to jimmymac. But I do well with Alicia's voice and accent. I can usually understand her just fine. In spite of that, I do often interpret what people say by listening to phrases or entire sentences, and context. So in difficult cases, even if I miss a word, I often don't stumble over it and lose focus. Just some related thoughts: I have determined for casual conversation it is usually more important to me to hear someone out, rather than to interrupt their train of thought. This is something I started doing during the cell phone era, specifically because of reduced technical standards and lack of intelligibility. Sometimes I will repeat a phrase or sentence (worded exactly as was spoken) as I hear it. This does the opposite for the speaker - it reinforces what they are saying rather than interrupt their train of thought. The people I know communicate in phrases or sentences, not just words. Repeating their phrases, word for word and NOT rewording anything, seems to have a positive net effect. Bad vocal technique: unnatural, strained, gimmicky, out-of-range, poor-annunciation, etc. I don't like to hear voices like this unless I am watching cartoons or listening to certain varieties of pop singers (male or female). The chances of that happening though are slim. Now poor annunciation is not the same thing as having an accent. One is being from a different locale, the other is just being a marble mouth. People from different locales can have great annunciation, in their own accent. So in short, I don't find people's voices "objectionable" unless it is not what they really sound like. I have a bit of a background in sound production and making people sound their best under tight time constraints and limited patience (that is how live production goes), so I'm sure that has something to do with it. There are little things you can do to help them, but I just like to hear people sound like themselves, whatever that may be. (This isn't a commentary on any TCM presenters, just a broader look at my own thoughts on the matter)

Yeah I figured you were trying to pry something like that out of it. Of course each person is unique, so that assumption falls flat on its face, doesn't it.

Normal/natural/unforced. Of course there is.

Here's a nice self-documentary of a movie theater that converted from film projectors to digital projectors. You will will probably learn more about digital projectors than you ever wanted to know, or knew to ask.

Maybe this guy? Not for me anyhow. I'll pass.

Or just somebody who can speak in a normal voice and sound good.

Here's one I came across. I don't think I saw this mentioned yet. It has a slightly different theme, but also retains some of the elements. So I'm not going to try to suggest this is your movie, but it does seem to fit into that group. Maybe this can lead to something else, maybe not. I'll look into it in different ways as they occur to me. Fortress of the Dead (1965) https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059195/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 reminds others of Rod Serling or Twilight Zone material sole survivor theme, before Sole Survivor (I just had to throw that one in there LOL) takes place in / around a damaged bunker, which had become a national monument or tourist attraction (but no crashed plane as far as I can tell) has ghosts, central character revisits camp where 37 in his camp were killed in a single incident years earlier a small cast of actors I am unfamiliar with directed by Ferde Grofe, Jr. (Possibly the son of the Grand Canyon Suite composer??) This is said to be a PD title, I have confirmed it to be available from Sinister Cinema No Youtube No archive.org

Coast to Coast AM - Fri Hedy Lamarr's Inventions/ Open Lines Hedy Lamarr was one of the most beautiful actresses of the 1930s and 40s, but many are unaware of her inventions that were the basis for cell phone and Bluetooth technology. Lamarr expert and researcher Bill Birnes joins Ian Punnett to discuss the two Lamarrs - the glamour icon whose ravishing visage was the inspiration for Snow White, and a technological trailblazer who perfected a secure radio guidance system for Allied torpedoes during WWII. Followed by Open Lines in the latter half. https://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2018/06/29 [Some of this could potentially be interesting for a few here]

Great!

Just checking to see if musicalnovelty is able to get my PMs.

Okay cool. Better too much than too little, and by design this isn't likely to skip over new entries. So bottom line: if you follow my list, you won't be likely to miss anything new.

You mean like this?

Yeah, I'd say at the bare minimum most people here at least use a DVR. There are a few who don't though. I just don't see how.

Okay, now I know that someone from programming is pulling our leg(s). On the late evening of July 6th / early morning of July 7th (found this while setting my DVR to record): 1:15 AM Trigger, Jr. (1950) [rarely shown Roy Rogers, but not a premiere] 2:30 AM I'm Gonna Git You Sucka (1988) ("blaxploitation" parody) I usually don't pay any attention to the themes and mind games here, just the movies. But still...really?? EDIT: here we go, never mind. All is well... I should have realized

Ok, so no newer than 1964-ish, maybe 1965? That could help those searching to focus on the right years.

Same.

I wonder how that will line up with movies that get nixed from the regular broadcasts. "We played it." "Oops. No we didn't." "No wait we did."

AT&T is purchasing TW for its content, and the value of the content is in its licensing fees to providers. So it would be stupid of them if they decided to cut off that income. I don't know if those from TW will continue to play the two-hand Monty here, charging TCM and other groups under the umbrella of the same parent company as if it were some outside org, or if that will end here. Also most SD is downconverted from HD channels. If there are still some SD-only channels, those wouldn't be eliminated unless HD equivalent are first brought out. If you only get HD channels, then your box should be able to downconvert to SD (if you need it to).

WRT Directv satellite service: So far all I've seen are some (out of context) quotes from the CEO giving a speech to tech investors at a meeting on new technology. Also some tech-fanboi-columnist speculation, and more consumer speculation. On another angle (which seems to still be under wraps), I have seen it mentioned elsewhere that there is a new satellite currently under construction. To me it looks like they just want to cover as many different areas of the market as they can. This includes bringing the "Directv Now" services up to par. If anything, the fiber Uverse branding may eventually be rolled into Directv Now, though at this point that is little more than just a name change. I predict that, as corporations so often do, they will take the path of least resistance and leave much of it as-is while adding some "new tech". At the end of the day, it all comes down to making more money than they spend.

I double-checked and was able to verify that The Dead actually did play back in June 2010. I've added this one in by hand.

The equipment seen in the recording sessions seems to be fairly up to date, so no surprises there, and the video quality looks crisp. I just thought it would be funny if it turned out to be much older. Well, this seems determined to be an ongoing conversation. 'Till later...